OneDnD Dungeons and Dragons future? Ray Winninger gives a nod to Mike Shea's proposed changes.

Micah Sweet

Legend
I mean...I don't practice Santeria, I ain't got no crystal ball, so I can't say that they won't fundamentally change the game in the future. But Tasha's Cauldron of Everything was not a fundamental overhaul of the 5th Edition game. It was some optional rules that the DM could adopt (and they were clearly labeled as such.)
The fact that those "optional" rules immediately became the law of the land moving forward makes that claim by WotC suspicious.
 

log in or register to remove this ad



amethal

Adventurer
Edit: the wish list seems so conservative it makes 3.0-> 3.5 look like a total rewrite of absolute incompatibility
From what I remember, the 3.5 rewrite suffered from a lot of "mission creep" and was initially intended just to clear up a few rules, make a couple of classes a bit more interesting and maybe nerf the Haste spell.

Then the Pathfinder "re-write" changed lots of things (we were still finding changes years later; Sleep is now a 1 round casting time?) but some things they refused to change. You can change the Paladin's casting stat, increase the wizard's hit die and allow/force barbarians to track individual rounds of rage, but apparently giving Fighters more skill points would have ruined backwards compatibility?

So once you start a rewrite it is very easy to get carried away. I don't play much D&D these days, so it's more of an academic interest for me, but if they fix it so I never see the words "Leomund's Tiny Hut" on this forum ever again I'll be very happy.
 

FireLance

Legend
"Make balors as dangerous as wolves."
The irony is, this is 5e working as intended, specifically, CR assumes the PCs don't have magic items because they are supposed to be bonuses and not a requirement. Then, people complain when a party of high-level PCs decked out with magic items (random rolls on the DMG's treasure hoard tables using the guidelines for a "typical" campaign on DMG page 133 mean that a party of 4 PCs can expect about 5 major magic items per person by 20th level - something also stated in Xanathar's page 135) curb stomps something that is supposed to be a challenge.
 



Micah Sweet

Legend
My dream would be a complete reworking of the format (from Core book layouts to better Character Sheets to reworked Monster Statblocks to the language used to write the rules... but very little (to almost no) rules changes (beyond balance-fixes).

Freshen it up for clarity and crispness. Keep it working essentially the same.
What would be the point of buying those books if you already own the 2014 versions? Is the new print intended only for new players going forward? I mean, if you care about the stuff they're supposedly updating, aren't you already playing that way now?

I just don't see why anyone who is playing now would buy these if the changes are as minor as everybody says.
 


Parmandur

Book-Friend
What would be the point of buying those books if you already own the 2014 versions? Is the new print intended only for new players going forward? I mean, if you care about the stuff they're supposedly updating, aren't you already playing that way now?

I just don't see why anyone who is playing now would buy these if the changes are as minor as everybody says.
New art.

But anyone playing now isn't the target audience, new players are.
 

rooneg

Adventurer
What would be the point of buying those books if you already own the 2014 versions? Is the new print intended only for new players going forward? I mean, if you care about the stuff they're supposedly updating, aren't you already playing that way now?

I just don't see why anyone who is playing now would buy these if the changes are as minor as everybody says.
I mean, it's pretty clearly going to revamp the core ancestries (MotM didn't give us new versions of them, so this will), and consolidating all the changes to the core classes along with whatever other tweaks is worth a new PHB to me. Better monsters in a new MM are also worthwhile.
 

Micah Sweet

Legend
I'm hoping that they also live up to Shea's desire for "wider, richer, more interesting, and more inclusive" content in this area. The trend for races since Tasha's has focused mainly on making character race lore significantly leaner... which is freeing for some, but leaves others cold. I think it's well within Wizards' capabilities to keep lore as inspirational as it's been in the past, while still keeping inclusivity in mind. It's more work, but worth it, I think.
Not work I would expect them to do. Bland, inoffensive, and short are the words of the corporate zeitgeist.
 

Micah Sweet

Legend
The design assumption is that all Eogues should be getting Sneak Attack every time that they attack. So as far as the decanters are concerned, it isn't a power boost, simply making the assumed action easier and more clear for players and DMs.
If you're supposed to have Sneak Attack all the time, what's the point of there being conditions on it at all? Why not just add the damage straight to their attacks as a class feature?
 

Nikosandros

Golden Procrastinator
If you're supposed to have Sneak Attack all the time, what's the point of there being conditions on it at all? Why not just add the damage straight to their attacks as a class feature?
That's a fair observation. My impression is that they included conditions for "compatibility" with previous flavor, but balance-wise they meant for it apply almost all the time.
 

Micah Sweet

Legend
This is one of those design assumptions that rests on top of other assumptions about how the rules would be read. Like, if you are the sort of DM who makes it practical for a rogue to cunning action hide and shoot with advantage afterwards then this was basically how it already worked. If you're the sort of DM who structures encounters or interprets the stealth rules such that this isn't possible then ranged rogues in your games often didn't get sneak attack (or had to jump through other hoops like obtaining a familiar or whatever to make it happen). I hope some of the wording on this stuff is cleared up to make the intent more obvious in 5.5e, it would make things easier for everyone.
Interviews and social media posts are a terrible way to communicate design intent. Not everyone follows the designers on Twitter. If you're not going to make your intent explicit in the game itself, at least put it on your website. 4e got that right at least with their pre-edition books.
 






An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top